Quote:
Originally Posted by RunKC
Clyde was a ****ing slow midget who ran a 4.57 and couldn’t pass block to save his life.
Comparing that to Henderson is legitimately insane. That’s like comparing a Percheron to a Donkey.
And at 31 we get a RB for 5 years at about $13.5 million total. But hey let’s take a project like Felix again if we get stuck like last time.
|
Yes, Clyde is a lot different player than Henderson. If the Chiefs were to take Henderson at 31, you'd get a lot of comparisons and complaints, but they're dumb.
And honestly, the same people complaining about getting him at 31 would be super on board with taking him at, say, 34 or 38, after a trade back that nets them a 4th round pick. Which in and of itself is kind of silly.
I think what surprised the team was how limiting Edwards-Helaires' height was to his receiving ability. You watch him in college and see the quickness and shiftiness just cooking LB on angle routes and flats... but his size really dropped that effectiveness at the NFL level. That, and the injury he suffered as rookie. He lost some burst after that, and didn't have enough to beging with to survive it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut
Are you new to draft season? Of COURSE it's all a big group think.
That's why we have people saying that Josh Simmons was a blue-chip prospect, likely OT1 and a potential top 5 pick had he not gotten hurt.
That's just not there. I wanted to talk myself into the idea a couple months ago and started looing at it -- you just cannot reach that conclusion. But draft thy name is Groupthink and once it started to get momentum from someone (who we now KNOW do favors for agents to get information) it bounced around the echo chamber enough to become fact.
This feels so much like the Jeremiah Johnson draft when that guy went from a late 1st round prospect in March to a top THREE possibility in April. Based on NOTHING. It was just draftheads talking themselves into him.
I truly believe that's what we're seeing here with Simmons.
I won't love the idea of taking him at 31, but I'd live with it. If we friggen trade UP to take that guy, In Veach We Trust my ass. His 1st round draft record is....fine. It's about what one would expect. McDuffie, Karlaftis and Worthy look like hits. FAU and MEH are likely misses. And when it comes to 'first selections' made in the 2nd round, you put Hardman and Speaks on there with Bolton. Again - pretty ordinary. Some good, some bad, some meh.
I will absolutely HOPE he works out. I'm most assuredly not going to just assume it.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut
Let's be really generous here. I'll borrow your math and then goose it a bit.
As a rule, 1st round picks become starters about 1/2 the time. Let's go ahead and kick that up a bit for the sake of argument to 2/3 and give it 66%.
Now let's take your 1/5 get back to form and goose THAT to 1/4. Shit, let's make it 1/3 to make it sporting.
In that event, the combined probability of Simmons A) being a genuine starting caliber player prior to injury and B) getting BACK to that level is going to be about 22%.
So you have a 1 in 5 chance at that point even when pushing the sliders in Simmons favor. You know what that is? A 4th rounder -- maybe.
I mean there's no way to rationally look at this that makes sense. I mean even if you get stupid with the math and say "Okay, a healthy Simmons had a 75% chance of being a starting caliber LT and Patella injuries have about a 50% return rate" that's going to give you about a 37% shot at the guy being a starter. It's a blatant falsehood and it's STILL about the kind of success rate you'd expect from a mid to late 2nd.
I just do not like Simmons as a first rounder even a little bit. It ignores....everything.
Hope ain't a plan, fellas.
And Hope is all that people are doing when it comes to Josh Simmons.
|
I just wanted to say, that I have no response to these two posts. They are perfect.
Consider me James Carville in Old School. You're Frank the Tank and you just made a perfect, unassailable argument.